Hellbound: Hellraiser 2

[MEITTI]

Its a bit weird but it kinda makes sense if you read the original book. If you want a stupid and crappy Hellraiser, go for the third film, or 6th, or any other hellraisers after 6th.

[Il Duce]

They stopped being good after the 3rd film the rest are just decent film's in the series.

[Sutter Kane]

I thought Hellraiser 2 was more entertaining than the first. The plot moved along at a quick pace, plenty of cenobite action and other than the CGI Helldog thing Hell looked pretty cool.

[DMHead777]

Hellraiser 2 is my favorite in the series

[steelba]

I thought Hellraiser 2 was more entertaining than the first. The plot moved along at a quick pace, plenty of cenobite action and other than the CGI Helldog thing Hell looked pretty cool.

There was no CGI in part 2 or a hell dog :noob:

[RustedChainsaw]

I thought Hellraiser 2 was more entertaining than the first. The plot moved along at a quick pace, plenty of cenobite action and other than the CGI Helldog thing Hell looked pretty cool.

You're thinking about "Bloodline", the fourth film. :stone:

[DMHead777]

Ahh Bloodline is terrible

[MEITTI]

Ahh Bloodline is terrible

Bloodlines wasnt really THAT bad. Its entertaining for its good blood-, and cenobite-effects alone. (Angelique is the hottest cenobite EVAH!) Try watching 3rd Hellraiser, thats one horrible movie.

[Sutter Kane]

I know that in one of the first 2 movies there was some bad CGI monster.

[Darkgod]

not in the first two... or third I think. The 4th an on had cgi

[steelba]

I know that in one of the first 2 movies there was some bad CGI monster.

CGI wasn't even around in cheap horror films back then fool

They had a bad claymation "Engineer' in the first I think.

[koolmike]

H:H2 is a solid sequel to an inferior Hellraiser. The script is alot tighter in part 2 and the story more enjoyable due to the fact it's easier to follow IMO. The depictions of hell in this one are interesting but nothing I haven't seen before. One only has to look at the works of M.C. Escher to see the heavy influence of his hell in this film. (a favorite artist of mine by the way)
http://de-bondt.eu/2009/09/05/default.aspx


I like to watch 1 and 2 together for I feel that they don't stand as well alone as they do watched together. Solid additions to the horror genre.

The rest of the installments are pitiful and sorry. So much potential wasted by silly writing and direction, not to mention the cheesy FX.

[MEITTI]

not in the first two... or third I think. The 4th an on had cgi

I think you forgot the incredibly crappy CGI effects on the third film.

[Molean]

Number 1 and 2 are both awesome! The rest are meh...I felt the second one had a faster paced story but both are equally enjoyable, special effects are awesome for its time...

[Godfatha]

H:H2 is a solid sequel to an inferior Hellraiser. The script is alot tighter in part 2 and the story more enjoyable due to the fact it's easier to follow IMO. The depictions of hell in this one are interesting but nothing I haven't seen before. One only has to look at the works of M.C. Escher to see the heavy influence of his hell in this film. (a favorite artist of mine by the way)
http://de-bondt.eu/2009/09/05/default.aspx


I like to watch 1 and 2 together for I feel that they don't stand as well alone as they do watched together. Solid additions to the horror genre.

The rest of the installments are pitiful and sorry. So much potential wasted by silly writing and direction, not to mention the cheesy FX.

When the focused shifted to the Cenobites, it all went to hell, if you'll pardon the pun.

[koolmike]

you're pardoned.